Some scattered thoughts on my end:

EFF and the people that support them will tell women, racial minorities, disabled, queer etc. to not do anything about their harasser in the name of holding up net neutrality. They will tell marginalised folk that ‘corporations are not on your side’ as if they are too stupid to realise it on their own. If you ask them what they should do instead to protect themselves they will just say it is not their job to stop harassment. If not they will tell you to report to the police (lol). Reason is that they don’t see marginalised folk as people with a stake in this that you should negotiate or listen to and they don’t see their current defense infrastructure as real, they see them as a pawn they might need to sacrifise in the long game they are playing. Innuendo Studios covers this mindset in his ‘Cost of Doing Business’ video. Text version for the hearing-impaired. Use this Tampermonkey script to remove the login popup.

Imagine a white women that is currently being abused by her husband. She calls the cops and said cops manage to handle the situation well despite the current problems. Now imagine a bunch of not-so-wise people telling the abused women in question that her method of getting herself out makes her pro-police brutality/ pro-prison industrial complex/ a racist bitch. That is the type of justice/ progress rules absolutists like EFF over here operate on.

EFF apologists also disingenuously mix the approval of individual actions with approval of the system. In this case ‘individual corporation refusing to serve kiwifarms’ to ‘corporations in general can control what is written’.

Some people in that comment thread say the banning is pointless because they can just create their own instance on Tor. However Tor is even less accessible than the mainstream internet so their libel and slander reaches less ears. Isn’t it still a victory of sorts?